1797+) 
ed, (yet the good confequences are fo ob- 
vious, that the remark is hardly ne- 
ceffary) that the happieft effects have 
flowed from the inftitution of honorary 
members. The number at firft were 
nine, afterwards increafed to twelve, 
but now reduced, by death and remiovals, 
to fix. By their means the mof perfect 
order has been preferved, altercations of 
every fort have been prevented, mutual 
animofities have been fofrened, and the 
defire of recommending themfelves to 
their patronefles *, and of being relieved 
in cafes of great diftrefs from their fund, 
has farther operated to the melioration 
and improvement of the whole charaéter, 
in the various and different relations of 
life 5 infomuch that it is now confidered 
in that neighbourhood as being nearly 
a fufficient teftimonial of general good 
conduét, to have it faid of any one, that 
* fhe has, for fome time, been a member of 
the Berwick fociety+. 
I have been led into fo-much detail, 
in order to convey the information I 
withed to give,that the account [ propofed 
totranfmit of the other female benefit 
club, mut neceffarily be deferred to a 
farther opportunity. If, however, in the 
mean time, Mr. Editor, you fhould think 
what is now fent you worth a place in 
your repofitory, you will, by inferting it, 
much oblige 
Your obedient fervant, 
York, Nov. 19, Catu. CaAPPE, 
1797- 
Se 
To the Edjtors of the Monthly Magazine. 
cy hgsitia, 
Oo’ looking into your Magazine for 
April laft, I obferved an article 
bearing the title of ‘ Plagiarifm of Mr. 
Leflie ;’ and, as there feemed not much 

_* The private fund of the Berwick fociety 
owes much of its profperity to the great libe- 
tality of an excellent lady, Mrs. Rayner, of 
Sunbury, whofe example, in devoting the 
greater part of an afHuent fortune to aéts @f the 
moit extenfive benevolence, is beyond all praife, 
and moft worthy of imitation, She has contri- 
buted sl. annually towards it ever fince its firft 
infitution, 
+ It was omitted to be mentioned in its 
place, that on the death of any member who has 
been fuch for three years, the fum of 11. is paid 
to her neareft relatives from the general fund 5 
2i.if fhe has been a member feven years, (in 
which cafe 6d, is to be contributed, by every 
Surviving member, to the fund), and the fum of 
gl. if the deceafed has been a member fourteen 
years; acontribution of 13, each, being, in thee 
Sale put intothe box, 
Mr. Leflie vindicated from Plagiarifon, 
415 
delicacy in this way of making a table 
of contents the vehicle of fo weighty, 
and as, I doubted not, fo unmerited an 
acculation, I was curious to fee by what 
evidence it was fupported. On turning 
to the article, I found it to confift of a 
letter from an anonymous ig sit Pade 
“containing remarks on Mr. Leflie’s pa- 
per, on the refolution of indeterminate 
problems, publifhed in the fecond vo- 
lume of the Tranfaétions of the Royal 
Society of Edinburgh, and affirming the 
method contained in that paper to betaken 
altogether from Euler’s Algebra without 
acknowledgement. As I happened to be 
better acquainted with the hiftory of this 
paper than any one except the author, 
I think myfelf called on to vindicate his 
charaéter, from a charge that I know 
to be ill-founded, and which, I think, 
you yourfelf muft allow to be brought 
forward on evidence much too flender. 
Firft, then, I am ready to admit the 
caincidence, in part of Mr. Leflie’s 
method, with one which Euler has 
ufed in a fingle inftance only, and for the 
folution of one particular problem, But 
the general method, which Euler em- 
ploys, has no affinity to Mr. Lefl.e’s 
whatfoever ; and the fokution, by means 
cf indeterminate multipliers, is adopted 
by him only in one- inftance: this is 
found, as your corref{pondent ftates, in 
chap. 6. art, $1. vol. iii—-I quote from 
the French edition *. 
Nor, fir, you muft allow me to obferve, 
with ref{peét to coincidences of this fort in 
general, that they do not of themfelves 
amount to any proof, either of borrowing 
ot of plagiart/m. In the folution of a pro. 
blem, there are but a certain number of 
methods that can be followed in the na- 
ture of things; andif the problem is of 
an elementary kind, as in the prefene 
cafe, that number cannot be great. This 
is fo much the cafe with the problem une 
der confideration, the folytion cf inde- 
terminate equation:, that all the mathe- 
maticians, who, from the age of Dio- 
phantus down to the prefent, have ap. 
plied themfelves to that fubjeét, have not 
produced more than three or four genee., 
ral methods of folutions effentiallv ditfer- 
ent from one another, What wonder 
then is there, if ingenious men, ftudying 
fuch a fubjeé&t, fhould, without any com- 
munication, fall into the fame tract with 
one another? Ts it not a thing that - 
* Our readers are doubiels aware, chat 
an Englifh tranflation of this work has secently 
made its appearance in London. Editor. 
ce ye mult 
